Re: <nettime> <MoneyLab> PeerValue conference review on INC MoneyLab blog

[Eduard Karel de Jong <eduard@dejongfrz.nl>]

   One of the interesting aspects of the Basic income discussion is how
   this topic that originates from morality and social justice has been
   hijacked by the libertarians, subverting its purpose into yet another
   way for the haves to exploit the have-nots and at the same time
   painting neoliberalism with a social-responsible and caring gloss. To
   me this seems like a prototype of the way neoliberal thought have
   poisoned society, like the "efficient government" meme as a nice flag
   (who doesn't want government to be fficient?) to cover for a program
   to  eradicate government spending that is aimed at thos most in need,
   except, of course, on subsidies for corporate entities. For
   libertarians efficiency seems one of the arguments in support of a
   basic income.

   Being so politicised, it may be hard to talk about the substance of
   Basic Income and its various ways it could be designed. We need to talk
   about how to change the narrative here. Another aspect might be to look
   at ways of wedging this concept in that would sidestep the big debate
   on full scale introcduction with its polarised objectives with Basic
   Income.

   --

   Eduard de Jong
   David Garcia wrote:

   Is it time for Money/Lab to have a candid discussion about the "Basic
   Income" model.

   This was put to the vote and defeated in Switzerland but as automation
   grows and is now

   touching previously "white collar" middle class jobs the impetus
   accross the political spectrumThat sounds like

   is to take this seriously.

   It could be that the economic impediments to implementing this might be
   substantive as

   well as ideological. Would Money/Lab be a place for a candid
   examination of the different models being

   proposed and what the practical challenges that would be in introducing
   it.



   -----------------------------------------------
   d a v i d  g a r c i a
   On 8 Sep 2016, at 15:09, Ueberschlag Leila
   <leila.ueberschlag@gmail.com> wrote:

   MoneyLab was present at the PeerValue Conference last week in Amsterdam
   and wrote an article about it called On-Demand Economy: More
   Regulations and Non-Profits Apps Needed to Build a Fairer Future.
   "Airbnb and Uber have recently been standing center stage in the
   international media theater. These dominant network platforms linking
   sellers and buyers bring new challenges to the field of the so-called
   collaborative economy and raise serious concern in terms of taxation,
   job security, healthcare insurance or work compensation. "When you get
   rid of governments but not of corporations, they grow out of control",
   said media theorist and best-selling author Douglas Rushkoff."
   Read the full article [2]here.
   Best regards,
   --
   Leila Ueberschlag | Intern MoneyLab#3
   Institute of Network Cultures
   Amsterdam University of Applied Sciences | HvA
   MoneyLab | 1&2 Dec 2016 | Pakhuis de Zwijger, Amsterdam
   www.networkcultures.org
   @INCAmsterdam

     _______________________________________________
     Moneylab mailing list
     Moneylab@listcultures.org
     http://listcultures.org/mailman/listinfo/moneylab_listcultures.org

References

   2. http://networkcultures.org/moneylab/2016/09/08/on-demand-economy-more-regulations-and-non-profit-apps-needed-to-build-a-fairer-future/

#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission
#  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,
#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets
#  more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l
#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime@kein.org
#  @nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in Subject: